Retrieval of multimedia documents by imprecise query specification

  • F. Rabitti
  • P. Savino
Session 5: Query Processing
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 416)


The retrieval process in multimedia document systems is inherently different from the retrieval process in traditional (record oriented) database systems. While the latter can be considered an exact process (records either satisfy the query or not), the former is not an exact process and the system must take into account the uncertainty factor (i.e. the answer is not only "true" or "false" but is often in between them).

Uncertainty is mainly introduced in evaluating how images and text components in documents are relevant to user's queries. Moreover, it may be useful to give the user some flexibility in specifying the query on multimedia documents (i.e. the "importance" of different parts of the query). The possibility to specify imprecise queries in a system can significantly increase the effectiveness and the precision in the retrieval process on multimedia documents.

This approach is being tested extending the MULTOS system, a prototype system for the storage and retrieval of multimedia documents.


Query Processing Retrieval Process Ranking Function Query Language Query Execution 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Barb85.
    F. Barbic and F. Rabitti, “The Type Concept in Office Document Retrieval,,” Proc. VLDB Conference, Stockholm (August 21–23, 1985).Google Scholar
  2. Barn81.
    J. Barnett, “Computational Methods for a Mathematical Theory of Evidence,” Proc. 7th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Vancouver, B.C., pp. 868–875 (1981).Google Scholar
  3. Belk87.
    N.J. Belkin and W.B. Croft, “Retrieval Techniques,” Annual Review of Information Science and Technology (ARIST) 22, pp. 109–145 (1987).Google Scholar
  4. Bert88.
    E. Bertino, S. Gibbs, and F. Rabitti, “Query Processing in a Multimedia Document System,” ACM Transactions on Office Information Systems 6(1), pp. 1–41 (1988).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bert88a.
    E. Bertino, A. Converti, H. Eirund, K. Kreplin, F. Rabitti, P. Savino, and C. Thanos, “MULTOS — A filing server for Multimedia Documents,” Proc. of the 1st EURINFO '88 Conf., pp. 435–442 (1988).Google Scholar
  6. Chri84.
    S. Christodoulakis and C. Faloutsos, “Design Consideration for a Message File Server,” IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering SE-10(2), pp. 201–210 (1984).Google Scholar
  7. Chri86.
    S. Christodoulakis, M. Theodoridou, J. Ho, M. Papa, and A. Parthia, “Multimedia document presentation, information extraction and document formation in MINOS: A Model and a System.,” ACM Transactions on Office Information Systems 4 (October 1986).Google Scholar
  8. Cont87.
    P. Conti and F. Rabitti, “Retrieval of Multi-Media Document Images in MULTOS,” Fourth Esprit Conference, New York-Amsterdam, pp. 1389–1412, North Holland (1987).Google Scholar
  9. Cont89.
    P. Conti and F. Rabitti, “Image Retrieval by Semantic Content,” Multimedia Office Filing and Retrieval: the MULTOS paradigm, New York-Amsterdam, pp. 290–320, North Holland (1989).Google Scholar
  10. Crof81.
    W.B. Croft, “Document Representation in Probabilistic Models of Information Retrieval,” Journal of the American Society of Information Science 32, pp. 451–457 (1981).Google Scholar
  11. Crof88.
    W.B. Croft and R. Krovetz, “Interactive retrieval of office documents,” Proc. Conf. on Office Information Systems, pp. 228–235 (1988).Google Scholar
  12. Crof88a.
    W.B. Croft and P. Savino, “Implementing Ranking Strategies using Text Signatures,” ACM Transactions on Office Information Systems 6(1), pp. 42–62 (1988).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Eiru88.
    H. Eirund and K. Kreplin, “Knowledge based document classification supporting integrated document handling,” Proc. Conf. on Office Information Systems, pp. 189–196 (1988).Google Scholar
  14. Gibb87.
    S. Gibbs, D. Tsichritzis, A. Fitas, D. Konstantas, and Y. Yeorgaroudakis, “MUSE: A Multimedia Filing System,” IEEE Software (March 87).Google Scholar
  15. Gord84.
    J. Gordon and E. Shortliffe, The Dempster-Shafer Theory of Evidence in Rule-Based Expert Systems, Addison — Wesley Publishing Company (1984), pp. 272–292. Buchanan B., Shortliffe E., (edt.)Google Scholar
  16. Hora86.
    W. Horak and G. Kronert, “An Interactively Formatting Document Editor Based on the Standardised Office Document Architecture,” Proc. of IFIP Conf. OFFICE SYSTEMS: Methods and Tools, pp. 287–300 (1986).Google Scholar
  17. Morr87.
    J.M. Morrissey and C.J. Van Rijsbergen, “A Formal Treatment of Missing and Imprecise Information,” Proc. of the 10th Annual International ACMSIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval, pp. 149–156 (1987).Google Scholar
  18. ODA85.
    ODA, Office Document Architecture, ECMA-101 (1985).Google Scholar
  19. Rijs79.
    C.J. Van Rijsbergen, Information Retrieval, McGraw-Hill, London: Butterworths (1979). 2nd EditionGoogle Scholar
  20. Rijs86.
    C.J. Van Rijsbergen, “A Non-Classical Logic for Information Retrieval,” Computer Journal(29), pp. 481–485 (1986).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Salt83.
    G. Salton and M. McGill, Introduction to Modern Information Retrieval, McGraw-Hill, London: Butterworths (1983). 2nd EditionGoogle Scholar
  22. Thom85.
    R.H. Thomas, H.C. Forsdick, T.R. Crowley, R.W. Schaaf, R.S. Tomlinson, V.M. Travers, and G.G. Robertson, “Diamond: A multimedia message system built on a distributed architecture,” Computer 18(12), pp. 65–77 (Dec. 1985).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1990

Authors and Affiliations

  • F. Rabitti
    • 1
  • P. Savino
    • 2
  1. 1.Istituto di Elaborazione dell' Informazione - CNRPisaItaly
  2. 2.Olivetti DORPisaItaly

Personalised recommendations